Fanagrams

Several years ago when I was preparing to take the SAT, I proposed the idea of the SexAT, a new test prep book specifically designed to appeal to high schoolers.  I would take existing SAT questions and simply reformat them into something more interesting and relevant.  Here’s how I would revise one of the hated problems on proportions and ratios.

Existing boring example that everyone hates:

The price of a telephone was first increased by 10% and then the new price was decreased by 25%.  The final price was what percent of the initial price?

New exciting and relevant revision in the bestselling SexAT:

Your fraternity house is hosting a party and wants to make a mixed drink out of vodka and juice.  Paul, the first taste tester, says the mixture was too weak, and he added 10% more vodka.  Sam the second taste tester, said the mixture was too strong so he added 25% water.  The final mixture was what percent of the initial?  Continue reading →

Next to my bed is a large stack of books, most of which I will never read.  I pick them up on occasional prowls through the local bookstore, or buy them based on a book review.  The problem is that I am far more ambitious when I buy books than when I want to read them.  Recent choices include “Upright, the Evolutionary Key to Becoming Human,” “Mycophilia” (about mushrooms), and “Mr. Gatling’s Terrible Marvel” (about the history of the Gatling gun).  However, I promised myself that I would make an honest effort at “Thinking Fast and Slow” a well reviewed book about how we think.  But about half way through it, I raised the white flag and hoped that perhaps there was an old Vanity Fair nesting amongst the dust bunnies under the bed.

Beside, I think that I’ve got the hang of the book.  The author, Daniel Kahneman, a psychologist, makes a pretty strong case that our exquisite brain, the 800 pound gorilla at the top of the food chain, basically relies on a mish-mash of biases, irrational “rules of thumb” (formally called heuristics) and stereotypes.  Here it is in a nutshell.  Kahneman describes two different patterns of thinking.  System 1 is our fast, automatic and emotional pattern of processing information.  In contrast, System 2 is slow, effortful, logical and conscious.  We would like to think that System 2 is the basis of human intelligence but here’s the problem.  System 2 is just plain lazy and defers to System 1 whenever it can.  In the meantime, System 1 struggles to keep up with the deluge of input and is forced to make quick and dirty decisions on incomplete information.  System 1 lacks the discipline to look beyond the surface and relies on “WYSIATI,” an acronym for “what you see is all there is.”  Basically System 1 desperately tries to stitch together a plausible story line from immediately available information, and in its rush is totally vulnerable to all sorts of biases, fallacies, stereotypes and prejudices.  The recent movie Moneyball contains a great example of Systems 1 and 2 at work.  A room is filled with grizzled baseball scouts who make System 1 comments such as, “He waddles like a duck, he’s no good,” or “He’s got an ugly girlfriend, and an ugly girlfriend means no confidence.  Don’t draft him.”  That is pure System 1, which contrasts with the GM, Billy Beane, who has a System 2 approach that focuses on a detailed statistical analysis of on base percentage. Continue reading →